• No results found

Redetermined structure of 4,4′ bi­pyridine–1,4 phenyl­enedi­acetic acid (1/1) co crystal

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2020

Share "Redetermined structure of 4,4′ bi­pyridine–1,4 phenyl­enedi­acetic acid (1/1) co crystal"

Copied!
7
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

(1)

Redetermined structure of 4,4

000

-bi-pyridine–1,4-phenylenediacetic acid (1/

1) co-crystal

Rima Paul and Sanchay Jyoti Bora*

Department of Chemistry, Pandu College, Guwahati-781 012, Assam, India. *Correspondence e-mail: sanchay.bora@gmail.com

Received 14 September 2015; accepted 19 September 2015

Edited by W. T. A. Harrison, University of Aberdeen, Scotland

The asymmetric unit of the title 1:1 co-crystal, C10H8N2C10H10O4, consists of one half-molecule each of

4,40-bipyridine and 1,4-phenylenediacetic acid: the complete molecules are generated by crystallographic inversion centres. The dihedral angle between the –CO2H group and the

benzene ring in the diacid is 73.02 (7). In the crystal, the components are linked by O—H N hydrogen bonds, generating [121] chains of alternating amine and carboxylic acid molecules. The chains are cross-linked by C—H O interactions. This structure was previously incorrectly described as a (C10H10N2)2+(C10H8O4)2 molecular salt [Jia et al.(2009).Acta Cryst.E65, o2490–o2490].

Keywords:crystal structure; co-crystal; supramolecular interaction; hydrogen bonding.

CCDC reference:1423417

1. Related literature

For the previous erroneous report of this structure as a mol-ecular salt, see: Jia et al. (2009). For hydrogen-bonded co-crystals, see: Stahly (2009); Kavuru et al. (2010). For phar-maceutical co-crystals, see: Childs et al. (2009); Walsh et al. (2003). For a similar structure, see: Chinnakaliet al.(1999).

2. Experimental

2.1. Crystal data C10H8N2C10H10O4 Mr= 350.36 Triclinic,P1

a= 4.5577 (5) A˚

b= 6.9806 (8) A˚

c= 13.7995 (15) A˚

= 99.508 (6)

= 94.297 (6)

= 97.643 (7) V= 427.05 (8) A˚3 Z= 1

MoKradiation

= 0.10 mm1

T= 296 K

0.200.170.13 mm

2.2. Data collection Bruker SMART CCD

diffractometer 8581 measured reflections

2405 independent reflections 1876 reflections withI> 2(I)

Rint= 0.028

2.3. Refinement

R[F2> 2(F2)] = 0.041

wR(F2) = 0.123 S= 1.05 2405 reflections

155 parameters

All H-atom parameters refined

max= 0.19 e A˚3

min=0.16 e A˚

3

Table 1

Hydrogen-bond geometry (A˚ ,).

D—H A D—H H A D A D—H A

O1—H9 N1i 1.02 (2) 1.62 (2) 2.6373 (13) 176 (2) C7—H6 O2ii

0.954 (16) 2.504 (16) 3.4196 (16) 160.8 (11) C9—H7 O2iii

1.00 (2) 2.45 (2) 3.4205 (18) 162.2 (16)

Symmetry codes: (i)xþ2;yþ1;z; (ii)x;y;zþ1; (iii)xþ1;yþ2;z.

Data collection: SMART (Bruker, 2004); cell refinement: SAINT (Bruker, 2004); data reduction:SAINT; program(s) used to solve structure:SHELXS97(Sheldrick, 2008); program(s) used to refine structure: SHELXL97 (Sheldrick, 2008); molecular graphics: ORTEP-3 for Windows(Farrugia, 2012); software used to prepare material for publication:SHELXL97.

Acknowledgements

Financial support from the Department of Science & Tech-nology, India (under FASTRACK Grant No. SB/FT/CS-047/ 2013) is gratefully acknowledged. The authors also thank the USIC, Gauhati University, Guwahati (India), for providing the X-ray diffraction data.

Supporting information for this paper is available from the IUCr electronic archives (Reference: HB7506).

References

Bruker (2004).SMARTandSAINT. Bruker AXS Inc., Madison, Wisconsin, USA.

Childs, S. L. & Zaworotko, M. J. (2009).Cryst. Growth Des.9, 4208–4211. Chinnakali, K., Fun, H.-K., Goswami, S., Mahapatra, A. K. & Nigam, G. D.

(1999).Acta Cryst.C55, 399–401.

Farrugia, L. J. (2012).J. Appl. Cryst.45, 849–854.

Jia, M., Liu, X., Miao, J., Xiong, W. & Chen, Z. (2009).Acta Cryst.E65, o2490.

data reports

Acta Cryst.(2015).E71, o799–o800 doi:10.1107/S2056989015017569 Paul and Bora

o799

(2)

Kavuru, P., Aboarayes, D., Arora, K. K., Clarke, H. D., Kennedy, A., Marshall, L., Ong, T. T., Perman, J., Pujari, T., Wojtas, Ł., Łukasz, & Zaworotko, M. J. (2010).Cryst. Growth Des.10, 3568–3584.

Sheldrick, G. M. (2008).Acta Cryst.A64, 112–122.

Stahly, G. P. (2009).Cryst. Growth Des.9, 4212–4229.

(3)

supporting information

sup-1

Acta Cryst. (2015). E71, o799–o800

supporting information

Acta Cryst. (2015). E71, o799–o800 [doi:10.1107/S2056989015017569]

Redetermined structure of 4,4

-bipyridine

1,4-phenylenediacetic acid (1/1)

co-crystal

Rima Paul and Sanchay Jyoti Bora

S1. Comment

Co-crystals represent a class of materials which contain two or more discrete molecular entities held together via non-covalent or supramolecular interactions in the crystal lattice (Stahly, 2009). Due to their robust and directional nature,

hydrogen bonds are extensively used as a tool to shape the structure of co-crystals (Kavuru et al., 2010). In this context, hydrogen bonds of varying strengths may be employed, ranging from strong O—H···O/N to weak C—H···π interactions. The resulting crystal structures can generate diverse physical and chemical properties such as solubility and stability that

differ from the properties of the individual components. Crystal engineering plays an important role in the formation of

co-crystals of desired properties so that they can find their applications in pharmaceutical industries (Childs et al., 2009 and Walsh et al., 2003). Herein, we report the supramolecular architecture of 1,4-phenylenediacetic acid and 4,4′-bi-pyridine co-crystal formed via O—H···N hydrogen bridges and C—H···π interactions.

The title compound can be prepared under hydrothermal condition using a mixture of 1,4-phenylenediacetic acid and

4,4′-bipyridine (1:1) in water. The acetic acid moiety involving C1, C2, O1 and O2 in 1,4-phenylenediacetic acid

molecule makes dihedral angles of 73.04 (4)° and 2.06 (1)° with the phenyl and pyridyl ring planes respectively. These

values are very close to those reported by Chinnakali et al. (1999). The dihedral angle between phenyl and planar pyridyl rings of 4,4′-bipyridine is found to be 73.21 (4)°. In the crystal lattice, the molecules are linked with one another through

O1—H9···N1 hydrogen bonds with O···N distance of 2.637 (1) Å that extends in one direction leading to a

supra-molecular chain like structure. These zig-zag 1D chains are further connected via C—H···O bridges (C7—H6···O2 and C9

—H7···O2 with C···O distances of 2.50 (1) Å and 2.45 (2) Å respectively) giving rise to a 2D layered structure in the

solid state. In graph set notations (Bernstain et al., 1995), such 1D chains can be described as C22(20) where the

subscripts and superscripts are the number of hydrogen bond donors and acceptors respectively. There are certain

hydrogen bonded rings of descriptors R12(7), R44(16) and R44(30) which have periodic repetitions throughout the crystal

lattice. The adjacent layers are stacked in nearly parallel fashion by means of weak C—H···π interactions (C···π distance = 3.838 Å) between the methylene C—H and phenyl ring–π systems. These weak intermolecular forces together with the strong hydrogen bonds form the overall 3D supramolecular architecture.

?

S2. Synthesis and crystallization

A mixture of 1,4-phenylenediacetic acid (1 mmol, 0.194 g) and 4,4?-bipyridine (1 mmol, 0.156 g) in water (10 ml) were

placed in a 23 ml Teflon lined stainless steel reaction vessel. It was then heated to 393K for 24 hours at a heating rate of

5K min-1. On overnight standing, rectangular block shaped colourless crystals were obtained. The crystals were then

(4)

S3. Refinement

Structure determination work was done using the WinGX platform (Farrugia, 2012). All the hydrogen atoms were located in difference Fourier maps and refined with isotropic atomic displacement parameters. No restraints were applied for any

[image:4.610.133.471.139.325.2]

other parameter during structure refinement.

Figure 1

[image:4.610.134.475.365.495.2]

The molecular structure of (I) showing 50% probability displacement ellipsoids.

Figure 2

A view of the O—H···N, C—H···O and C—H···π interactions observed in the crystal structure of the title compound.

4,4′-Bipyridine–1,4-phenylenediacetic acid (1/1)

Crystal data

C10H8N2·C10H10O4

Mr = 350.36

Triclinic, P1

a = 4.5577 (5) Å

b = 6.9806 (8) Å

c = 13.7995 (15) Å

α = 99.508 (6)°

β = 94.297 (6)°

γ = 97.643 (7)°

V = 427.05 (8) Å3

Z = 1

F(000) = 184

Dx = 1.362 Mg m−3

Mo radiation, λ = 0.71073 Å

µ = 0.10 mm−1

T = 296 K

(5)

supporting information

sup-3

Acta Cryst. (2015). E71, o799–o800

Data collection

Bruker SMART CCD diffractometer

Radiation source: fine-focus sealed tube Graphite monochromator

phi and ω scans

8581 measured reflections 2405 independent reflections

1876 reflections with I > 2σ(I)

Rint = 0.028

θmax = 29.8°, θmin = 3.0°

h = −6→6

k = −9→9

l = −19→19

Refinement

Refinement on F2

Least-squares matrix: full

R[F2 > 2σ(F2)] = 0.041

wR(F2) = 0.123

S = 1.05 2405 reflections 155 parameters 0 restraints

Primary atom site location: structure-invariant direct methods

Secondary atom site location: difference Fourier map

Hydrogen site location: inferred from neighbouring sites

All H-atom parameters refined

w = 1/[σ2(F

o2) + (0.0605P)2 + 0.0515P]

where P = (Fo2 + 2Fc2)/3

(Δ/σ)max = 0.001

Δρmax = 0.19 e Å−3

Δρmin = −0.16 e Å−3

Extinction correction: SHELXL, Fc*=kFc[1+0.001xFc2λ3/sin(2θ)]-1/4

Extinction coefficient: 0.061 (11)

Special details

Geometry. All s.u.'s (except the s.u. in the dihedral angle between two l.s. planes) are estimated using the full covariance

matrix. The cell s.u.'s are taken into account individually in the estimation of s.u.'s in distances, angles and torsion angles; correlations between s.u.'s in cell parameters are only used when they are defined by crystal symmetry. An approximate (isotropic) treatment of cell s.u.'s is used for estimating s.u.'s involving l.s. planes.

Refinement. Refinement of F2 against ALL reflections. The weighted R-factor wR and goodness of fit S are based on F2,

conventional R-factors R are based on F, with F set to zero for negative F2. The threshold expression of F2 > 2σ(F2) is

used only for calculating R-factors(gt) etc. and is not relevant to the choice of reflections for refinement. R-factors based on F2 are statistically about twice as large as those based on F, and R- factors based on ALL data will be even larger.

Fractional atomic coordinates and isotropic or equivalent isotropic displacement parameters (Å2)

x y z Uiso*/Ueq

O1 0.8197 (2) 0.45294 (13) −0.18830 (6) 0.0541 (3)

C1 0.7209 (2) 0.60720 (15) −0.21279 (8) 0.0408 (3)

C2 0.5619 (3) 0.71533 (19) −0.13310 (10) 0.0490 (3)

C3 0.7850 (2) 0.86342 (15) −0.06291 (8) 0.0400 (3)

C4 0.9459 (3) 0.80852 (16) 0.01476 (9) 0.0454 (3)

C5 0.8422 (3) 1.05717 (17) −0.07687 (8) 0.0446 (3)

O2 0.7616 (3) 0.66207 (15) −0.28973 (7) 0.0675 (3)

N1 0.8832 (2) 0.73182 (15) 0.32203 (7) 0.0476 (3)

C6 0.8316 (3) 0.67172 (18) 0.40629 (9) 0.0517 (3)

C7 0.6844 (3) 0.77149 (18) 0.47798 (9) 0.0487 (3)

C8 0.5796 (2) 0.94340 (15) 0.46266 (7) 0.0376 (2)

C10 0.7840 (3) 0.8964 (2) 0.30711 (10) 0.0566 (3)

C9 0.6326 (3) 1.00451 (19) 0.37423 (9) 0.0532 (3)

H9 0.927 (5) 0.382 (3) −0.2421 (15) 0.104 (7)*

(6)

H4 0.731 (3) 1.100 (2) −0.1302 (11) 0.055 (4)*

H6 0.660 (3) 0.722 (2) 0.5378 (12) 0.067 (4)*

H1 0.462 (4) 0.621 (2) −0.0977 (12) 0.065 (4)*

H8 0.822 (4) 0.935 (2) 0.2459 (13) 0.073 (5)*

H7 0.560 (4) 1.122 (3) 0.3533 (13) 0.081 (5)*

H2 0.412 (4) 0.787 (3) −0.1669 (12) 0.071 (5)*

H5 0.902 (4) 0.551 (3) 0.4159 (12) 0.071 (4)*

Atomic displacement parameters (Å2)

U11 U22 U33 U12 U13 U23

O1 0.0764 (6) 0.0483 (5) 0.0463 (5) 0.0272 (4) 0.0173 (4) 0.0141 (4) C1 0.0449 (6) 0.0370 (5) 0.0403 (5) 0.0071 (4) 0.0035 (4) 0.0055 (4) C2 0.0434 (6) 0.0489 (6) 0.0549 (7) 0.0115 (5) 0.0119 (5) 0.0025 (5) C3 0.0431 (5) 0.0405 (5) 0.0396 (5) 0.0148 (4) 0.0163 (4) 0.0046 (4) C4 0.0580 (7) 0.0363 (5) 0.0467 (6) 0.0141 (5) 0.0146 (5) 0.0116 (4) C5 0.0545 (7) 0.0452 (6) 0.0394 (5) 0.0184 (5) 0.0097 (5) 0.0116 (4) O2 0.1023 (8) 0.0630 (6) 0.0502 (5) 0.0351 (6) 0.0215 (5) 0.0232 (4) N1 0.0507 (6) 0.0478 (5) 0.0450 (5) 0.0158 (4) 0.0075 (4) 0.0023 (4) C6 0.0643 (8) 0.0439 (6) 0.0511 (7) 0.0221 (6) 0.0096 (6) 0.0075 (5) C7 0.0631 (7) 0.0441 (6) 0.0443 (6) 0.0189 (5) 0.0116 (5) 0.0117 (5) C8 0.0370 (5) 0.0374 (5) 0.0379 (5) 0.0073 (4) 0.0026 (4) 0.0045 (4) C10 0.0714 (9) 0.0614 (8) 0.0466 (7) 0.0285 (6) 0.0200 (6) 0.0159 (6) C9 0.0691 (8) 0.0515 (7) 0.0490 (6) 0.0284 (6) 0.0181 (6) 0.0166 (5)

Geometric parameters (Å, º)

O1—C1 1.3051 (13) C5—H4 0.972 (14)

O1—H9 1.02 (2) N1—C6 1.3264 (16)

C1—O2 1.2056 (14) N1—C10 1.3301 (16)

C1—C2 1.5147 (16) C6—C7 1.3820 (17)

C2—C3 1.5108 (17) C6—H5 0.964 (17)

C2—H1 0.970 (16) C7—C8 1.3906 (15)

C2—H2 1.027 (17) C7—H6 0.955 (16)

C3—C4 1.3877 (16) C8—C9 1.3850 (16)

C3—C5 1.3908 (15) C8—C8ii 1.486 (2)

C4—C5i 1.3844 (18) C10—C9 1.3810 (17)

C4—H3 0.961 (15) C10—H8 0.950 (18)

C5—C4i 1.3844 (18) C9—H7 0.998 (19)

C1—O1—H9 112.6 (12) C3—C5—H4 120.1 (8)

O2—C1—O1 123.26 (10) C6—N1—C10 117.10 (10)

O2—C1—C2 123.39 (11) N1—C6—C7 123.47 (11)

O1—C1—C2 113.30 (10) N1—C6—H5 116.3 (10)

C3—C2—C1 109.58 (9) C7—C6—H5 120.2 (10)

C3—C2—H1 110.0 (9) C6—C7—C8 119.66 (11)

C1—C2—H1 108.9 (10) C6—C7—H6 119.0 (10)

(7)

supporting information

sup-5

Acta Cryst. (2015). E71, o799–o800

C1—C2—H2 107.7 (9) C9—C8—C7 116.53 (10)

H1—C2—H2 111.2 (13) C9—C8—C8ii 121.59 (12)

C4—C3—C5 118.28 (11) C7—C8—C8ii 121.88 (12)

C4—C3—C2 121.06 (10) N1—C10—C9 123.35 (12)

C5—C3—C2 120.61 (10) N1—C10—H8 115.3 (10)

C5i—C4—C3 120.99 (10) C9—C10—H8 121.3 (10)

C5i—C4—H3 119.3 (9) C10—C9—C8 119.89 (11)

C3—C4—H3 119.7 (9) C10—C9—H7 116.0 (11)

C4i—C5—C3 120.73 (11) C8—C9—H7 124.1 (11)

C4i—C5—H4 119.2 (8)

Symmetry codes: (i) −x+2, −y+2, −z; (ii) −x+1, −y+2, −z+1.

Hydrogen-bond geometry (Å, º)

D—H···A D—H H···A D···A D—H···A

O1—H9···N1iii 1.02 (2) 1.62 (2) 2.6373 (13) 176 (2)

C7—H6···O2iv 0.954 (16) 2.504 (16) 3.4196 (16) 160.8 (11)

C9—H7···O2v 1.00 (2) 2.45 (2) 3.4205 (18) 162.2 (16)

Figure

Figure 1

References

Related documents

Political Parties approved by CNE to stand in at least some constituencies PLD – Partido de Liberdade e Desenvolvimento – Party of Freedom and Development ECOLOGISTA – MT –

In the case of delay minutes accrued when considering a response based on an observation (Table 8), running at reduced speed (response 3) and cancelling trains (response 1)

This model posits four types of health beliefs that affect an individual’s health behavior, in this case, the decision to seek mental health services: perceived

In the previous sections, we dis- cuss the expectation that a neural network exploiting the fractional convolution should perform slightly worse than a pure binary (1-bit weights

Colliers International makes no guarantees, representations or warranties of any kind, expressed or implied, regarding the information including, but not limited to, warranties

• Our goal is to make Pittsburgh Public Schools First Choice by offering a portfolio of quality school options that promote high student achievement in the most equitable and

The largest transactions in the third quarter of 2015 on the Polish M&A market were the acquisition of PKP Energetyka SA by the CVC Capital Partners and the acquisition of

Comments This can be a real eye-opener to learn what team members believe are requirements to succeed on your team. Teams often incorporate things into their “perfect team